Courtrooms are supposed to be where cases are heard, not where the right to a lawyer is tested. This week at Makindye Chief Magistrate’s Court, both issues collided.
Bail Deferred, Mention Set for June 30
Counsel Erias Lukwago, former Kampala Lord Mayor, appeared before Makindye Magistrate’s Court on a charge of misprision of treason. His legal team applied for bail. Instead of a same-day decision, the court deferred the ruling.
The explanation given was practical and procedural: conditions in and around the courtroom, plus the number of issues raised by both sides that needed study. The court said the bail decision will come within 24 hours through ECCMIS, the Electronic Court Case Management Information System.
Lukwago was further remanded. He is to return on June 30, 2026, for mention. That date is also set for the appearance of Dr Kizza Besigye, whose lead counsel is Lukwago. Aligning the two dates is not unusual in high-profile matters, but it does concentrate public attention on one courtroom on one morning.
A Defense Team Short One Key Member
While Lukwago faced court, his defense team faced immigration at Entebbe. A senior Kenyan lawyer who traveled to join the Besigye and Lutale defense was denied entry and directed to return home. The lawyer’s colleagues were admitted.
No public reason was given at the airport. The Law Society of Kenya, in a June 22, 2026 press statement, said it received the reports “with profound concern” and noted the denial raises serious questions about advocates in the East African Community freely engaging on matters of justice and the Rule of Law. The Society described the visit as being in connection with the administration of justice and the welfare of a fellow advocate.
For the defense, the effect is immediate: a lead international counsel is absent at a moment when the local lead counsel is himself before court on criminal charges. For the public, the effect is symbolic. It reads as a narrowing of legal space.
Why This Matters Beyond One File
The Right to Counsel Is Tested at the Gate, Not Just the Bench
A fair trial begins before a witness is sworn. If an accused cannot choose and consult counsel of their preference, including regional lawyers in cross-border cases, the trial is already weakened. Blocking entry of a senior advocate, without a stated legal basis, creates the impression that the state prefers a thinner defense. In criminal law, appearance matters as much as substance.
Charging the Lawyer Changes the Incentive Structure
When a defense lawyer is himself charged, two things happen. First, colleagues think twice before taking similar briefs. Second, clients lose experienced hands at critical moments. Misprision of treason is a serious charge. Whether it proceeds or not, the process itself becomes a cost to legal practice. Over time, that cost is paid by ordinary Ugandans who need bold representation in tough cases.
ECCMIS Is a Good Tool, But It Cannot Carry Trust Alone
Delivering rulings by email through ECCMIS improves efficiency and reduces crowding. It is a welcome reform. But efficiency must not be confused with fairness. People will accept a digital ruling if they believe the process leading to it was open, reasoned, and unpressured. The optics this week — bail deferred, lead counsel absent, international counsel turned back — will be read by many as pressure, whether or not that was the intent.
What the State Gains, and Risks, With This Approach
Blocking or detaining lawyers may look like a short-term tactic to manage a difficult case. In practice, it carries long-term risk. Courts derive authority from being seen as forums where even unpopular defendants get a full defense. When that perception slips, judgments lose weight in the public mind. Appeals multiply. Regional bodies and East African legal networks take interest. Investment climate, diplomatic relations, and bar association solidarity are all affected.
A state confident in its case usually wants the best lawyers on the other side. It proves the point in open court. A state that shrinks the defense table invites the opposite conclusion: that the case cannot survive full scrutiny.
What Should Happen Next
For the judiciary: deliver the bail ruling in writing, with clear reasons, on ECCMIS as promised, and keep the June 30 mention tight and orderly. Perception will improve if procedure is visibly by the book.
For immigration and security agencies: if a foreign lawyer is to be excluded, state the legal ground. Vagueness fuels suspicion. Uganda is part of regional legal and trade protocols that expect cross-border practice under clear rules.
For the legal profession: document, coordinate, and continue. The Uganda Law Society and East African counterparts, including the Law Society of Kenya, have a role in monitoring access, offering input where appropriate, and ensuring that no accused person is left without competent counsel because counsel itself is under threat.
Bottom Line
June 30 now carries double weight: mention for Besigye and a courtroom where Lukwago must appear while his own bail is pending. The broader question is simpler. Do we want a system where lawyers can stand up without looking over their shoulder? If the answer is yes, then lawyers must be allowed to work, and courts must be seen to protect that space.
A regime that can try its opponents is strong. A regime that can try them with their lawyers present is credible.
